The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Off Topic Discussions > J.J Abrams is Star Wars-ing it now as well............
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-29-2013, 02:50 AM
starwarsrcks's Avatar
starwarsrcks starwarsrcks is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 3,062
Default

I feel excited about JJ at the helm of Star Wars as long as he captures the spirit and tone of the original trilogy then we will be fine.
__________________



Space is disease and dangerous wrapped in darkness and silence-Leonard Bones McCoy
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 01-29-2013, 03:36 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Martok.

I can see where Moore's words could be viewed as insults. But I would probably view the people who were most offendes by it as being perhaps slightly blinkered towards the 70's show and simply not open to a different take. That happens. But when your central concept is the decimation of a population then I guess you have to decide just what your general tone is going to be and where you want to put characters. Then go with it.

I'm sure that there could be argued that depending on your POV then there could be pretension in elements of BSG. But there's pretension in Star Trek as well (usually when Picard gets fired up every now and again). It just kind of crops in there sometimes. Of course depending on one's inclinations it may not be viewed as pretension.

I don't mind a certain fluidity to tone certainly myself. The largest issue is agreeing on whether certain Trek elements are 'gone' or not. And we know that calculation differs for a lot of people not just on this forum. And it doesn't mean people who enjoyed Star Trek care less or don't mind...............it's simply arriving at a different conclusion based on material. At the end of the day that sometimes cannot be reconciled between those who do disagree.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 01-29-2013 at 03:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 01-29-2013, 08:58 AM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,458
Default

Friend, Horatio,

I hope my one statement did not sound like it was angled toward you. No, not at all. I fully understand your position. I was simply referring to this one dude/ette who really took the ideology position a wee bit too far.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 01-29-2013, 09:07 AM
omegaman's Avatar
omegaman omegaman is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Posts: 4,603
Default

Just will put his stamp on Star Wars and it will be no less cinematic than the last crop, how could it be anything less. Same as Trek, there will never be a return to the good old days... They're over... Some people will be disappointed that's a given.
__________________
TREK IS TREK. WHATEVER THE TIMELINE!

The next TV Series should be called STARFLEET!
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 01-29-2013, 09:30 AM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Martok.

I can see where Moore's words could be viewed as insults. But I would probably view the people who were most offendes by it as being perhaps slightly blinkered towards the 70's show and simply not open to a different take. That happens. But when your central concept is the decimation of a population then I guess you have to decide just what your general tone is going to be and where you want to put characters. Then go with it.

I'm sure that there could be argued that depending on your POV then there could be pretension in elements of BSG. But there's pretension in Star Trek as well (usually when Picard gets fired up every now and again). It just kind of crops in there sometimes. Of course depending on one's inclinations it may not be viewed as pretension.

I don't mind a certain fluidity to tone certainly myself. The largest issue is agreeing on whether certain Trek elements are 'gone' or not. And we know that calculation differs for a lot of people not just on this forum. And it doesn't mean people who enjoyed Star Trek care less or don't mind...............it's simply arriving at a different conclusion based on material. At the end of the day that sometimes cannot be reconciled between those who do disagree.

Believe it or not, my friend, there are a few fans of classic Galactica out there who see "let's agree to disagree" as nothing more than a cop out to not succumbing to one of their new series rants. You either love classic Galactica, or you're a GINOid (GINO = Galactica In Name Only.....GINOid = someone who supposedly loves new Galactica at the expense of the original show.)

Another big problem some classic fans had: Critics kept heaping praise on the new series (and rightfully so), but at the expense of the original series, by calling the original "cheesy", "campy", "full of 70's trappings (feathered hair, disco balls, disco lights", "kiddified", etc. Supposedly, that was bad enough, but it was the more hard core fans of the new series who agreed with these critics who decided to take it down to the fan level, and apparently began bullying old series fans. A sort of "See....your team does suck!" mentality. But, that was a small caste, attacking another small caste, similar to how a small caste of one sports collectives' fans attacking another small caste of opposing sports collectives' fans. And there are a few of those old series fans who will never forgive or forget. They cling onto this notion of being bullied as their levee against anything remotely to do with the new series.

However, it was not entirely the new series' fans' fault. Some original series fans were equally at fault for attacking those who dared suggest that the new series had something worthy to offer.

My position was: "I don't care who started it, it's b.s. that this fan-warring ever became engaged in in the first place."

Both shows, as indeed any show, are products of their time.

The original series was produced in a time when Standards and Practices were a lot more strict. The original Galactica was intended to have a somewhat more mature context, but because of the time slot that the series aired, basically "family hour", a lot of concessions had to be made.

The new series was obviously not so constrained, and even found a few clever ways to get around censors. The reworking of the word "frak" to represent a current day "f-bomb", when in the original series, "frak" was just another innocent swear similar to "darn" or "heck". Some original series fans hated that perversion of the word. Most of the jaded fans are simply upset that a show they used to be able to watch with their parents is now a show that they themselves cannot watch with their own children, and feel that they don't want to watch in the first place.

That's why I show no devotion to any one particular show or movie...I am not a fanatic. I love both Galacticas, all Star Wars, and all Star Trek deeply, but not to the point of devotion where I cannot accept another's take on that show.

For me, the new Galactica was a truer representation of what I expected to see in a story about mankind's fall, and exodus to try and find sanctuary, succor, and support against those who sought their extinction.

__________________

Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 01-29-2013, 09:45 AM
omegaman's Avatar
omegaman omegaman is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Posts: 4,603
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112 View Post
Believe it or not, my friend, there are a few fans of classic Galactica out there who see "let's agree to disagree" as nothing more than a cop out to not succumbing to one of their new series rants. You either love classic Galactica, or you're a GINOid (GINO = Galactica In Name Only.....GINOid = someone who supposedly loves new Galactica at the expense of the original show.)

Another big problem some classic fans had: Critics kept heaping praise on the new series (and rightfully so), but at the expense of the original series, by calling the original "cheesy", "campy", "full of 70's trappings (feathered hair, disco balls, disco lights", "kiddified", etc. Supposedly, that was bad enough, but it was the more hard core fans of the new series who agreed with these critics who decided to take it down to the fan level, and apparently began bullying old series fans. A sort of "See....your team does suck!" mentality. But, that was a small caste, attacking another small caste, similar to how a small caste of one sports collectives' fans attacking another small caste of opposing sports collectives' fans. And there are a few of those old series fans who will never forgive or forget. They cling onto this notion of being bullied as their levee against anything remotely to do with the new series.

However, it was not entirely the new series' fans' fault. Some original series fans were equally at fault for attacking those who dared suggest that the new series had something worthy to offer.

My position was: "I don't care who started it, it's b.s. that this fan-warring ever became engaged in in the first place."

Both shows, as indeed any show, are products of their time.

The original series was produced in a time when Standards and Practices were a lot more strict. The original Galactica was intended to have a somewhat more mature context, but because of the time slot that the series aired, basically "family hour", a lot of concessions had to be made.

The new series was obviously not so constrained, and even found a few clever ways to get around censors. The reworking of the word "frak" to represent a current day "f-bomb", when in the original series, "frak" was just another innocent swear similar to "darn" or "heck". Some original series fans hated that perversion of the word. Most of the jaded fans are simply upset that a show they used to be able to watch with their parents is now a show that they themselves cannot watch with their own children, and feel that they don't want to watch in the first place.

That's why I show no devotion to any one particular show or movie...I am not a fanatic. I love both Galacticas, all Star Wars, and all Star Trek deeply, but not to the point of devotion where I cannot accept another's take on that show.

For me, the new Galactica was a truer representation of what I expected to see in a story about mankind's fall, and exodus to try and find sanctuary, succor, and support against those who sought their extinction.

__________________
TREK IS TREK. WHATEVER THE TIMELINE!

The next TV Series should be called STARFLEET!
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 01-30-2013, 05:50 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112 View Post
Friend, Horatio,

I hope my one statement did not sound like it was angled toward you. No, not at all. I fully understand your position. I was simply referring to this one dude/ette who really took the ideology position a wee bit too far.
No problem, I understood that you talked about another guy who is simply wrong. First because DS9 ain't fascist by a long way and second because liking a fascist piece of art (e.g. 300) doesn't imply that you are a fascist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112 View Post
TThe new series was obviously not so constrained, and even found a few clever ways to get around censors. The reworking of the word "frak" to represent a current day "f-bomb", when in the original series, "frak" was just another innocent swear similar to "darn" or "heck". Some original series fans hated that perversion of the word. Most of the jaded fans are simply upset that a show they used to be able to watch with their parents is now a show that they themselves cannot watch with their own children, and feel that they don't want to watch in the first place.
Interesting, I didn't know that frak was already used in the original series. IMO it was a brilliant way to evade censorship and about kids, well, IMO BSG is too violent and desperate for kids anyway so I don't think it is a problem that there is verbal obscenity on the show. I also think that it is one of these many details that make it feel realistic.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 01-30-2013, 11:00 AM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,458
Default

That was always a problem among the old school BSG fans as well.

"Reality?! Really?! Gritty, dark realism?! Battlestar Galactica is meant to be escapist! I watch Galactica to escape real-life, not relive it like the news!" Some would say.

In addition to reality, or realism, another of the mounting problems old school hardcores had was that the characters in the new Galactica series, and the settings seemed pretty much indistinguishable from contemporary humans and settings on Earth. "Suits and ties?! Humvees?! Really?! No one wearing robes, or otherworldly looking clothing?! These people might as well be from Earth. In no way do these people make me feel like they are our brothers from across the stars!"

"And why is so advanced a people (supposedly) not using energy weapons?! No laser weapons?! Why does everyone have to fire bullets!? They can have faster than light travel, but no lasers?!"

Ron Moore's intent was to make it a sort of allegory of 9/11. Old schoolers who hated the new show would retort that they had no problems relating with the characters of old, who had honor and hope, and flowing robes, instead of this nigh-dysfunctional society that wears suits and ties, and has bullet based weaponry, and in no way makes us think of otherworldly beings.

The arguments went on and on.

I once wrote a fanfiction called "Battlestar Galactica: Dark Exodus" which was a story of Galactica finding Earth, the Earth of 2039, which was just starting on the fringes of developing space based defenses. However, I am also someone who enjoys realism....and a few even hailed my work as being similar to that of Tom Clancy (high praise indeed, as Clancy is one of my favorite authors). But, the reason they could deal with the realism in my story is because I still kept the story in the vein of the original Glen A. Larson universe.

My latest (yet unfinished) work is "Galactica: The Last Battlestar", which is actually a melding of both the Glen Larson and Ron Moore Galactica universes, in such a way that it actually works. Characters like Starbuck, Boomer, and Cain are guys again. Characters like Valerii and Kara are their own persons. I gave a new naming convention to the story, since I always had a problem with "one name" names from the original series, that helps make distinctions among characters, but is compatible with the "one name" usage by making the "one name" element an informality in Colonial society. (Old schoolers had a problem with names like "Apollo" and "Starbuck" being call-signs, and not the names of old.) The ships of the Ron Moore era of Galactica were the old tech in my story. The classic Galactica (500 yahrens old in the original series) was actually the new "state of the art" battlestar in my tale. Amazingly enough, even the hardcores who hated just about everything of the new series, had a good time reading my story, because I helped them to clear hurdles they might not have had an easy time with had the story been entirely "new series" oriented. While my story contains many elements of the new series, it is largely in the spirit of the original Glen Larson universe.

And I think Ron Moore must have read my story too, because I've seen elements of my story in both the final episodes of the new series, and in Caprica, the short lived prequel series. (And I can tell you that my stories were in the works, and partially published online long before the final season of Galactica, or the airing of Caprica.) I ain't complaining though. Mine are simply fanfics, and if he wanted to use elements for his show, I, quite truthfully, am honored.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 01-30-2013, 12:08 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

BSG simply modified the "high tech, low life" idea of cyberpunk (another short definition of this genre might be dystopian science-fiction with a corporatist background and a noir-ish foreground), it is low tech and low life. At least if we refer to the touchable technology, the drive system and the Cylons obviously imply technological improvements.
One main theme of BSG is the old sci-fi idea of androids being more human than ourselves (Bladerunner, Terminator) in terms of freedom or obsessions with a duty and so on and the resulting exploration of what it means to be human. This theme doesn't hinge on stupid details like whether there are guns with bullets or rays.

I only have a problem with the technological backwardness indirectly, insofar as it is a symptom of Moore's anti-Trek attitude. He hated technobabble which is dubious for a sci-fi writer but understandable, decided to get rid of technology to a large degree which is fine .... but then he ended up filling his show with theobabble and having a literal deux ex machina in the finale. I don't have a problem with religion in sci-fi but "God saved the day" is as lazy as "the tachyon beam saved the day" and if you talk the entire time about the paganism of humankind and Cylon monotheism you better fill it with some content.
So yeah, the deus ex machina and the vague religious talk (with the emphasis being on vague, not religious) are things I dislike.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 01-30-2013, 12:47 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112 View Post
That was always a problem among the old school BSG fans as well.

"Reality?! Really?! Gritty, dark realism?! Battlestar Galactica is meant to be escapist! I watch Galactica to escape real-life, not relive it like the news!" Some would say.

In addition to reality, or realism, another of the mounting problems old school hardcores had was that the characters in the new Galactica series, and the settings seemed pretty much indistinguishable from contemporary humans and settings on Earth. "Suits and ties?! Humvees?! Really?! No one wearing robes, or otherworldly looking clothing?! These people might as well be from Earth. In no way do these people make me feel like they are our brothers from across the stars!"

"And why is so advanced a people (supposedly) not using energy weapons?! No laser weapons?! Why does everyone have to fire bullets!? They can have faster than light travel, but no lasers?!"

Ron Moore's intent was to make it a sort of allegory of 9/11. Old schoolers who hated the new show would retort that they had no problems relating with the characters of old, who had honor and hope, and flowing robes, instead of this nigh-dysfunctional society that wears suits and ties, and has bullet based weaponry, and in no way makes us think of otherworldly beings.

The arguments went on and on
My feeling there would be those sorts of criticisms often come from people who had decided to either strongly object to or outright hate the 'new' version of the show anyway and then were basically coming up with ever more pointless criticisms.

Not unlike those '100 reasons Abramstrek sucks' type lists that float around. When you set out to dislike a thing from the start..............people will eventually cling to anything in proclamation of it's percieved flaws.

Usually some have merit, some make you shrug your shoulders and go 'whatever'!

But I think getting bogged down in things like lasers is just missing any point the material has. The great enormous beauty of sci fi and all it's levels from hard sci fi to sci fi tinged with fantasy is that you can do it any way you want. You can go way the heck out there into the future with lasers and so what, or you can set it in very contemporary settings and it still is sci fi. Or a world that's just a little different than ours. From 'Star Wars' to 'Never Let Me Go' (a film that does not reveal itself as sci-fi for some time but ultimately is very much so when all is revealed).

A lot of that is whatever window dressing you want to use to dress up whatever story or theme you're telling.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 01-30-2013 at 12:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:48 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.